The pragmatic nature of the script

[davidjackson]

Anton: Natural languages also can have ornate letters, even hieroglyphics apart. Consider, for example, the glagolithic alphabet.

Glagolithic was an invented alphabet. 9th century, wasn't it?

Anton: I think the simplest reason for the script being "fluid" is that it was understood in advance that much is to be written using the script. Simple (vs ornate) script just saves effort of writing.

Yet other scripts, designed from the ground up, did not have this consideration, as discussed above.

ReneZ: I guess you are (also) referring to the pseudo-scripts that were popular from 1300-1500 in Western art. [..] In the middle ages one could apparently learn the names of the people who invented all the know alphabets:

Yes, although here you are also talking about Renaissance linguistic epistemology. My thoughts as I wrote the post were, I confess, more along the lines of the invented scripts we read about in the archives of the Spanish Inquisition - impressive looking charms (and curses!) sold by charlatans to the gullible. Interestingly enough, the Church in Spain did not consider this sort of hedge magic to be real and vendors uncovered by the Inquisition were usually prosecuted under civil law rather than being subjected first to church Inquisition.